Kullen

Kullen's page

165 posts. Alias of Kirth Gersen.


RSS

1 to 50 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
So, why doesn't the wizard cast spider climb on the rogue? D&D is a TEAM game.

And the rogue uniquely brings... what, exactly, to the group? "Hey, guys, all I ask is that you cast your good spells on me instead of yourselves. In exchange, I'll, um, receive all your good spells for you!"

If it's a TEAM game, then every member should contribute to the team. If some only take, without giving back, it stops being a team and becomes a charity ward.


master_marshmallow wrote:
THIS IS NOT A DEBATE.

Of course. Quite understandable that you wouldn't want a debate, if your points aren't backup up by things like "facts."


Moonclanger wrote:
But not the quick fix Mr Spencer is looking for.

I don't think Mr Spencer is looking for a fix. AlastarOG already pointed this out: behavior strongly suggests he just wants to troll people by repeating a bunch of tired myths and then spewing lame sarcasm at anyone who's a sucker enough to try and patiently rebuke them yet again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wheldrake wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:
Man, I disagree with, like, all of this.

That's the thing with the leadership feat. It's a highly divisive topic, and folks will hotly debate both sides. Many players want to give the feat maximum cheese (free crafting, optimised design, etc) while many DMs just want to avoid any semblance of controversy, so they ban the feat.

IMHO, as a DM you don't have to ban the feat if you put clear-cut limits on it, and let the player know about those limits before he selects it (or allow him to swap it out if he ends up feeling cheated).

The thing is, if you allow maximum cheese, it's just too powerful to be a feat - it does give you a second character, after all.

But hey, I do get what Tacticslion is saying. My perspective is as a DM, and wanting to keep the option of having one of my players choose the leadership feat, without risking the extreme cheese it can lead to.

Protip: Your input will be a lot more meaningful if you take the time to understand and actually re-state positions other than yours, rather than simply assuming base motives and dishonesty on the part of everyone except you. In the hundreds of threads about the Leadership feat, any number of DMs have weighed in about the myriad reasons they encourage it -- none of which have to do with "player cheese."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Villain Name: Gin Dildo
Supervillain name: The Lounge Lizard
Appearance: Reptilian humanoid in a polyester leisure suit
Backstory: Bad combination of experimental designer drugs washed down with too much alcohol, and the effects went hideously wrong.
Superpowers: Turn water to alcohol, immune to intoxicants, pick up women. Aura of sleaze in a 30-ft. radius. He can also open his mouth wide enough to swallow people whole.
Motivations: Purely hedonistic.
Secret Hidden Base: Hedonism II Resort, Caribbean.
Minions: Villainous versions of porn stars and producers, played in the movie by themselves (a la Orgazmo).
Arch Enemy: Batman and Robin from the old TV show.
Weaknesses: Uncontrollable fear of androids ("they'll never replace my minions!"), and inability to work with them. This obviously is a problem when he's on the same team as Brainiac and the like, so he often calls in instead of attending meetings in person.
Played in the Movie By: Ron Jeremy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
All feats are not alike. Nor should they be.

A pound of feathers and a pound of bricks are not alike. The fact that they're the same weight has little or nothing to do with a lot of their other qualities. Shoot, they might even cost the same amount, but they are still not "alike."


SorrySleeping wrote:

The magic spell already happened. It's there. Fumble and the wizard sent it off in the wrong direction.

Spell fumbles don't make sense to me to roll on a magic failure chart because the magic already happened. The wizard already cast acid splash. That part is done. He messed up and sent it flying too short and hit his fighter instead (or the ground) does make sense.

So, your casters don't need to perform verbal or somatic components, and casting is instantaneous? Do they need to make Concentration checks if threatened? No? The house rules you're describing, to me, seem even stranger than fumble rules.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
And very few fumble results are hit yourself with your own sword either. - straw man.

"I don't like it when it rains. Even though it doesn't happen very often, the streets here flood when it does."

RDM42: "It doesn't rain very often here either. - staw man."
Everyone Else: ???


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
Are we really getting into complaining about complaints?

Evidently so, since that's exactly what you were doing.

CorvusMask wrote:
What next, complaining about complaining about complaining?

That was "prior," not "next." And the irony of so doing was not lost on me.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
So I don't really like these types of threads since they just become complaint threads.

Gee, that almost sounds like a complaint right there...

CorvusMask wrote:
But yeah, I agree with idea that its insulting to see people think name sounds stupid just because its not English name

That one, too, come to think of it.


nosig wrote:
off the coast of Esperance... separates it from the blue Southern Ocean.

Are these even real places?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
HWalsh wrote:

When I GM, I GM. I'm in charge.

If I'm going to bust my hump for 12+ hours per week putting content together for one session I'm not going to be hampered by demands about GM style.
The Dude wrote:
"You're not wrong, Walter. You're just an a&~*%*!."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TheAlicornSage wrote:
And yet, I've never seen any player do anything of the sort.

Yeah, I've never been to China. And yet, I don't deny it exists. In fact, I know a lot of people who HAVE seen it, even if I haven't.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, there needs to be a flag for "arguments of One-True-Wayism." That would save a lot of effort.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:
On the other hand, if a substantial proportion of the audience is blind but not deaf, then making noise for their benefit would actually be helpful.

Exactly so. I'm all in favor of making accommodations for a disadvantaged group, but not if it's at the expense of disenfranchising an even more underprivileged group.

And, like I said, you can see who's clapping, and you can easily discern yelling even if there's no sound

A point was made that people who don't do well in noisy crowds would prefer the "jazz hands," but one might reasonably assume there are an equal number of people who don't do well in large crowds of people who are making exaggerated arm movements.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
I believe what happened is that the more progressive people said "no cheering because of disabilities" meaning social anxiety, sensory processing disorder etc.

I would think that just sitting among a huge crowd would already present a barrier for those people -- wouldn't they be more likely to watch it televised, rather than live, and text or tweet in comments/approvals? I, personally, have a very hard time being around that many people (my father has the same problem), but those people not cheering doesn't in any way lessen the issue.


"Jazz hands" are inherently exclusive of those with limited use/mobility in their arms, and also exclusive of the visually-impaired. On the other hand, cheering or clapping provide a visual as well as auditory display, can be performed by those with limited arm use (cheering) and by those with limited use of their voices (clapping), and are therefore MORE inclusive, not less.

The attempt at inclusiveness isn't necessarily bad, but the glaring obliviousness to basic logic is.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Dude Lebowski wrote:
Orville Redenbacher wrote:
I think its called the suck effect when you think too much about Don Henley's music. Sucks reason right out of your head.
{nods, slides Orville a white Russian}

Get out of my cab!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jader7777 wrote:
Okay folks, that was a fun Pathfinder game. Hope to see you all next week. Oh and make sure you bring another character sheet okay? Great see you then.

As opposed to "Oh, you're 1st level and you encounter Cthulhu! Roll initiative! A 6! Cthulhu rolls... 19! I mean 1! He slips on a banana peal and dies! You win!!! Okay folks, that was a fun Pathfinder game."

If you thought your post was scathing commentary, this reply is what it sounds like coming from the other direction.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ryan Freire wrote:
Due respect but insult or not insult isn't determined by the person who offers it or their intentions, but the person who receives it.

For example, if someone is insulted by you lying to them...


5 people marked this as a favorite.

In 2016, all the people like the ones being hectored in the quote finally did get mad, and did decide to do something about it.

Unfortunately, their solution was to elect Trump.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Bring the thunder and the gm is likely going to bring the noise.

How about "I'm rubber, you're glue!" -- that one always sells your point, too.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I'm hearing a lot of "I absolutely do not want this to happen and if I find out I'm going to be mad."

Which sort of underlines the point that if you're going to do it, you ought to make sure nobody finds out.

Does that also apply to murder, in your mind? It seems like a somewhat morally-dubious conclusion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
I agree that Democrats haven't been great on the economic front in the last decades, though I don't think it's as bad as you do. They've still vastly outperformed Republicans.

That's like the Son of Sam saying, "well, I didn't kill nearly as many people as Ted Bundy!"

When enough people get desperate enough, "not as bad" still isn't good enough. At least Bernie, as crazy and unelectable an old coot as any we've recently seen, understood this much. Trump got it -- we know he won't fix it in reality (and will in fact make it a lot worse), but at least addressing it head-on was enough to get him elected.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:
"Identity politics" is literally just a buzzword for "we're tired of hearing about civil rights, worry more about white men".

As opposed to, "Hell with the economy, let us be good serfs to our corporate overlords, as long as white men are serfs on the same (or, preferably, lower rung) than a transgendered biracial person." Which is something I hear a lot of, just not in those exact words.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
it's not that Count Chocula has rendered Vampires forever not-scary

Yeah. Twilight rendered vampires forever not-scary.


Sundakan wrote:
Would you kindly shut up? This used to be an interesting thread.

You mean, before it turned into:

"Atheists are all misogynist pigs!"
"No, leftists are just witch hunting, as usual!"
"Ha! See, you ARE a pig! Oink! Oink!"

I'm pretty sure that "I'm rubber, you're glue!" should come next.


jocundthejolly wrote:
The printmaker Anthony Green has said in a BBC interview that an interest in religious themes can be the kiss of death to an artist’s career. The quest for transcendence tends to be shunned in contemporary fiction, too...

That's why Passion of the Christ "only" grossed $611,899,420 so far and counting. Not like it's the highest-earning R-rated film in U.S. history or anything... (Wait, need to check against Deadpool! Yep, Mel still noses out Marvel by $7M or so.)


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Back in the day, a clone was a copy of you, not a place for your spirit to go back to. That's why all of Manshoon's clones activated all at once and declared war on each other. A couple were still around after the dust settled, one of them got turned into a vampire.

Bah. 2e Forgotten Realms is newfangled. Get off my lawn!


I keep seeing comments like these, and I keep thinking that these people died of various causes -- the year itself is not a sentient being that murdered them.

Spoiler:
Yeah, I get it, it's supposed to be a witticism, but it's only witty for the first person who said it, not for everyone who keeps repeating it.

All that said, I kind of liked George Michael. Sorry to see him go.


Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
As my personal rule, I do not vote for anyone running unopposed.

Like Hillary, for example?


ClingClong wrote:
I would point out as evidence of this countless men who killed and died on war fields in the name of imaginary beings.

Which, when you describe it that way, makes it seems very pointless and silly, doesn't it?

ClingClong wrote:
Now that we got that laid out let's scale down and bring it back to game level. The "fluff" is not fluff at all. It is the material with which the fabric of Golarion's reality is made.

Wait... you just lost me. People adhering maniacally to imaginary stuff leads them to pointlessly die IRL, so we should encourage and, indeed, enforce it in a game, too?

Hopefully that's not where you were headed. I'll try and develop the courage to read paragraphs 75-116 of your post and see if I'm misunderstanding.


Gark the Goblin wrote:
Here's a good essay that sums up the fallacies in the Tragedy of the Commons.

Well, sure, it's not like fisheries are collapsing or anything...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I blame video games!


Aberzombie wrote:

Parker said: "It has changed everything about who I thought I was."

Parker is a twit.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RDM42 wrote:
Why does every race/class combination need to be equally viable?or even viable at all?

Do you play a lot of Commoners?


bugleyman wrote:

Sincerely,

College-educated America

We don't need no book learnin'! We came up by the school of hard knocks (and pretend like that ain't such a tired cliche that it should have gone into the dustbin years ago)!

I reckon the only book we need is this here Good Book, and we need common sense a lot more than book sense!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Snowlilly wrote:
The two gaming styles are mutually exclusive at any given point in time.

In the same way that only the moon or the stars can be out at night, but never both!


Rednal wrote:
they want to know about financial conflicts of interest, see proof somebody can manage their money well, and so on.

We already KNOW that Trump can't manage money to save his life, to the point where additional proof of that is sort of not needed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here's my rule. Does the writer sound like a pretentious d-bag using words like "boni" or "whilst"? Then it's OK to make fun of them.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Wait... is the OP really saying "The game is totally unbalanced, but any problems that causes are the players' fault for not being sufficiently unaware of the problems"?

The Dutch should never repair dikes and levees. They should just tell people that walking and swimming are the same thing, so the problem will go away. It's all just dryness envy, after all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MeanMutton wrote:
Sounds like a jerk.

Boo hoo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TOZ wrote:
Tormsskull wrote:
Plus there are times when people post things that they think are funny, but in turn simply distract from the topic at hand.
Yeah, I've been trying to be better about that.

If by "better about it" you mean "do it more often," then so have I!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Melkiiador wrote:
The d20pfsrd doesn't really factor into this, as it has nothing to do with being official.

We're talking about a game. Or, more accurately, a second- or third-generation knockoff of a game. It's hard to take words like "official" seriously, in that context.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hulk Hogan having sex IS newsworthy, because it means he somehow found a way to circumvent at least one well-known side effect of all those steroids he spent all those years abusing...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SunstonePhoenix wrote:
I've always been creative.

And modest, too, huh?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Guy survives a nuclear blast by hiding in a refrigerator -> ridiculous, destroys immersion.
Guy survives a nuclear blast by reaching into a bagful of bat guano and speaking in fake Latin -> totally realistic, builds immersion.

Except the second example is even sillier than the first one.


hiiamtom wrote:
There are literally every single cryptozoological creature in existence in the base setting

Meaning none?

Because Bigfoot is not really in existence. That's what it's cryptozooligical instead of just zoological.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Forever Slayer wrote:
I know your miles may vary but I am seeing a lot of wrong reasons to like a certain type of character.

You failed the "fact or opinion" quiz in 2nd grade, didn't you?

I can decide I like Commoners the best. I don't even NEED a reason for that at all -- much less the "right" reason.


Guru-Meditation wrote:
Is it so hard to understand?

Disagree =/= fail to understand. Again, my quibble is with elevating "look at other stuff as sort of a list of loose guidelines that may or may not apply, then pick a number" to the status of a "rule."

That's not what I'd consider a set of rules. It's barely a rule of thumb.

In traffic, the rule is to stop at a red light. Not "compare what the other people are doing and then decide if it's OK to ignore the light, or maybe follow it, or maybe modify it." There are then additional rules to determine if it's OK to turn right on red, after having stopped; these may vary by state or even by light, but not by the driver's opinion.

1 to 50 of 165 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>